10 August 2012

Speaking in tongues at the LCWR

The Redneck Squirrels have released me from bondage long enough to post this. . .


NB.  There's no solid evidence that the Good Sisters of the LCWR are taking this gobbledegook seriously; however, by inviting this woman to address their assembly as the keynote speaker, we may safely assume that they do not find her gibberish in any way odd or offensive.  

They refused to allow Bishop Blair to speak at their gathering.  They didn't even want him to attend!  

So:  Freaky New Age guru--YES!  Catholic bishop--NO!

Go figure.
___________________

Follow HancAquam and visit the Kindle Wish List and the Books & Things Wish List

Click on St. Martin and donate to the Dominicans! ----->

15 comments:

  1. I know Archbishop Sartain (Seattle archdiocese) asked to be at the meeting and they refused.

    Now, the video - my husband and I both watched about 3 minutes of it. We have a lot of people who sound just like that here! Among the Full Moon Tea Ceremonies, Sexological Bodyworkers, New Age Alchemy....I think Barbara Marx Hubbard would fit in quite well here :-)!! We have quite the, um, colorful population. Tin-foil hats, anyone??

    ReplyDelete
  2. Susan Maria7:40 AM

    Probably the smartest thing we could do (and aren't) is totally ignoring them, doing our version of a "news blackout" because all the LCWR is doing is having a massive 2 year old tantrum. (After all, if BMH says she is right out of the womb why not continue the metaphor!).

    I think the only way to explain it is collective senility. Given the median age of this group that wouldn't be too off the mark.

    Seriously, these women are consecrated souls and time is not on their side. We should be praying for their salvation!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Susan, agreed. . .praying for the sisters is a must. Their current situation is better explained by their embrace of radical feminism and cultural Marxism. The need to undermine ecclesial authority through endless processing is typically a Marxist-feminist tactic, i.e. "keep the enemy dialoguing while you make the changes you want and then claim that those changes are now custom." Their embrace of New Agey gurus like BMH is also partly the result of cultural Marxism, i.e. "undermine the dominant paradigm using familiar language with radical meanings." For example, their constant use of the words "freedom" and "dialogue." The bishops in charge of the LCWR reform really need someone fluent in radicalese to advise them!

      Delete
    2. You are doubtless familiar with the inflated curialese that most Vatican documents are written in. The bloviating oceans of Stercus Tauri that these women produce make the old boyz in Rome sound like Ernest Hemingway.

      Like it or not, "models" of the Church though there be, the Roman Church's identity is founded on a trinity of doctrine, hierarchy and sacraments. Whatever else it may be, at no time in history was it ever not that. These women, like a lot of puffy-brained Vatican II types, seem to think that the whole enterprise was born Athena-like from the head of 1968. They seem, despite their degrees, to have lost the ability to see the historical shape of Catholicism.

      Delete
  3. Scott W.11:45 AM

    Probably the smartest thing we could do (and aren't) is totally ignoring them, doing our version of a "news blackout" because all the LCWR is doing is having a massive 2 year old tantrum. (After all, if BMH says she is right out of the womb why not continue the metaphor!).

    For years on the blogosphere, I've hear the media blackout suggestion many times. (During the protest of The DaVinci Code off the top of my head.) The problem is that it is utterly unworkable unless every Catholic media source agrees to it, and they are not going to. If something is newsworthy, it's newsworthy--and that is going to trump public-relations strategems every time. Better to not give them a monopoly on the flow of information.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's actually BECAUSE of their academic degrees that they believe what they do. . .degrees in modernist takes on religious education, spirituality, pastoral studies, feminist theology, etc.

      Delete
  4. The abundance of neologisms, the new-age cliches being thrown randomly, the non-sequitur train of thought, etc. Was I the only one to laugh out loud at the pompous and ridiculous posturing that goes by as depth and meaning of this homonym guru of the founder of Scientology and of other new-age gurus?

    ReplyDelete
  5. fr. Dismas, OP11:49 AM

    I got somewhat irate when someone online said it was all because they're so involved with the poor, etc.

    I pointed them to the CSMWR site, and said "Ok, here's the Missionaries of Charity and the CFR's -- two of the most dedicated, 110%, to the poor. Why is the Vatican not bothering them?"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh, Poor Fr. Dismas! You're appealing to logical consistency and good will. Silly friar! The LCWR and its media allies are only interested in perception. . .b/c that's all that exists in the goofy, New Age, un-world.

      Delete
  6. I wonder what it would be like if women and men, conservatives and liberals, Christians and New Agers just put down the defenses and acknowleded and loved one another as brothers and sisters. Oh my...guess its time for another pot brownie...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Can we love one another and disagree? Love doesn't mean accepting and approving of lies.

      Delete
    2. Father, father! There are no disagreements in the womb. ALL is Love! There are no lies. We cannot tag each others truths with our own self-imposed labels. In the womb all is warm and fuzzy and floating and free. We dialogue openly - our minds are unformed, our hearts are open, our feet are bare. We are in the ocean of supreme acceptance and mercurial....

      Sorry, must have drunk the wrong kool-aid ;)!!

      Delete
    3. Yes, but I think if the women are being all radical feminist, it must be a defense, and you know men...the guys are defensive too, cuz no body likes being called the 'patriarcy' like its a bad word...thats not disagreement, its defensiveness. I do think there are areas of disareement too, but what really has everyones undies in a bunch in the first place is sort of like the ancestral wound I would call it. Makes people defensive. Of course if you are all peace and love like I try to be sometimes, people do walk all over you...I need a kombuca. I read that systems thinking handbook, defensive.

      Delete
    4. Well, for whatever may be worth, last Friday I came across this. Not sure I totally subscribe to it but it's definitely insightful.

      Delete
  7. 1. My goodness, that woman made no sense at all. But it was English.

    2. I'm a practicing charismatic Catholic, and I'm kind of dismayed when people use "speaking in tongues" to mean "saying complete nonsense." Maybe the title could be something like that.

    ReplyDelete